tv Government Access Programming SFGTV January 12, 2018 6:00am-7:01am PST
>> this is a reminder to silence all electronic devices. fire commission regular meeting january 10th, 2018. item one roll call. president ken cleaveland. >> present. >> vice president stephen nakajo. >> here. >> commissioner michael hardeman. commissioner francee covington. commissioner joe alioto veronese
and commissioner joanne hayes-white. public comment, the comment shall address remarks as a commission as a whole and not to individual commissioners or department personnel. not to enter into debate with a speaker. the lack of response does not necessarily constitute agreement with or support with statements made during public comment. >> is there any public comment? >> please come forward. and identify yourself. welcome. >> good morning. i'm the author of 1906 the novel about san francisco earthquake and fire. and the documentary film maker of the finest ruins.
after the 1906 earthquake, the citizens of san francisco passed the largest bond issue ever, $5.9 million to build a supplemental water supply system. that system has not been expanded into probably 15 of the most vulnerable neighborhoods. it was the work of absolute genius. there are two major components to it, a gravity fed system of the giant tanks. and high pressure december diesel pumps and there are 42,000 wood buildings not
protected by that system. there are 300 out there with a limited supply of water, each of which needs a fire engine to draft from it. a high pressure system in that area with two diesel pumps would give the neighborhood unlimited supply of salt water with a positive flow. every high pressure system out there that takes three valves can supply more water than four or five fire engines if knew figures are correct, a massive amount of water that doesn't have to be repressurized. the communities are vulnerable and it's not just in earthquakes and fires. i believe in -- i have done as much research as i can, in 2014 during the mission bay fire, the awss had to be brought in because it took 17 million gallons of water to put out the
fire. in 1989, it took 5.5 million gallons of salt water that was a quarter of a block to put out the fire. there are two things necessary, not just post earthquake, in a city built to burn according to a previous fire chief, you need a massive supply of available water and the system to deliver it. those systems are indispensable to the survival of the city. thank you. >> thank you very much. any other public comment? welcome. >> good morning. i'm tracy thompson. i live in the inner sunset. and i'm here because i'm a concerned citizen, i read some recent articles regarding the lack of a system to fight a firestorm in the inner sunset
and outer sunset in the richmond, etc cetera. from what i understand and what the sfpw has admitted that if this were to happen, a firestorm, there's no way to fight this kind of fire. i'm not a fire fighting expert, but it seems to me that if we don't have awsf, the auxiliary water system to fight a fire, if we fail to expand the system to all neighborhoods of the city, we won't be able to put out fires post-earthquake and as you know, we just had an earthquake that felt pretty strong january 4th. if we can't put out a fire or this kind of fire, when it happens, nothing else matters. meaning, you know, our little
neighborhood beautician projects and the money that gets allocated to choose what we do with the neighborhood. it seems to me that since 2010 the money has been voted for and passed for but nothing is available to fight this kind of fire. and the city is a billion dollar economy and we're getting a winfall here, the city hall is getting a winfall from airbnb, uber and all these other start-ups but there's no money for $650 million to build it out in the areas that need it? we also pay the same taxes that the other parts of the city pay. and yet we don't have this kind of protection that the other
parts of the city has. so, i'm here because i strongly believe that there's a gap here and it needs to be addressed. and it is being addressed, but it needs to be put in place immediately. thank you. >> thank you very much. any further comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. madam secretary, would you call the next item? >> item three approval of the minutes, discussion of possible action to approve meeting minutes of december 13th, 2017. >> is there any public comment on the meeting minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners, what's your pleasure? vice president nakajo. >> president, thank you.
on the agenda i have in terms of the minutes, if we're looking at december the 13th, is that what we're looking at madam secretary? >> correct. >> i believe i was present at that meeting. it says excused on my copy. so if i could have that corrected or verified. >> yeah. >> thank you madam secretary and mr. president. >> would anybody like to make a motion or additional comments? chief. you want to add something? >> we talked about this earlier but i did find where you had indicated you thought graduation for the 123rd class was february 28th because it's in the minutes. so i ask on page 4 top of the minutes, the graduation which i will speak about briefly in my presentation, the corrected date is february 8th not 28th.
thank you. >> thank you. may i have a motion to approve the minutes. >> a second? all in favor. aye motion carried. madam secretary, call the next item. >> item four, report on fiscal year 2018/2019 capital information technology budget request. report from chief financial officer on the 2018/2019 capital it budget. >> good morning mr. corso. >> finance and planning here with our regular budget item for the first meeting in january. usually approval of department submission for capital it and in this case potentially fleet for budget proposals due to the fact that those are usually due a month or so earlier than the normal operating budget.
a brief presentation and then happy to answer questions. with regards to the capital and it budgets, the approval process is a little different than the normal operating budget. departments submit budget requests, this year by january 12th which is friday. submittals are to the capital planning committee, the cpc. those are in advance of the operating budget. they're vetted through the separate committees independent of the overall budgets and then they both develop various funding scenarios, levels of funding and those funded under the scenarios and work with the mayor's budget office to come with a budget number and depending on that budget number, it would be funded and proposed as part of the mayor's overall
budget on june 1st. so last year as part of the two year budget, we had two years of capital funding, the current year and the next year, the first year of looking at here. this is what we're currently funded this year, approximately 3.4 million and currently in the budget next year but will be reevaluated, general facility maintenance, specialized focus scope projects and in addition, some planning funds that go to future planning for the easter program, those are eventually reimbursed but can get the departments ahead as far as planning efforts. some of the current capital initiates we're working on, we're working on the 2010/2014 bonds and public health and
safety bond programs and those close out those projects and the beginning of many of the projects and those bonds. projects included range focus scope, roofs, generators, electrical, etc cetera to kind of the larger scale projects we have, station five, station 16, station 35 and ambulance deployment facility. and we're working with dpw on potential projects for the 2020 bond using some of the planning fund and taking a survey of our department facility and the greatest areas of need and then dpw, similar to what they have done in the past prior to the 2010/2014 bond, they're in the process of doing analysis of all the facilities to get a better idea of what each specific system for the facilities, for example roofs and generators, what the needs are for each facility. it's a rather comprehensive
report, we'll brief the commission when we have it. we're working close with dpw on that. we use it partly as justification, as many of you know, we have hundreds of millions of dollars in need and part of that work is being able to stick more concrete numbers and examples in it. and the more planning funding we have, the more information we have been able to get. we have a better understanding of the exact condition of our facilities and in addition based on some of the work done on easter, dpw has a more realistic idea of the cost on that. that is in the works currently with dpw. here is our proposal for the capital budget. these projects are not identified, there's details in the commission packet. these are currently not identified as being part of the
public health bond or the easer scope and in total as you can see, there's approximately $33 million requested in the first year and 53 in the second year. this is similar to what we proposed in the past. we have updated on the actual work completed by dpw and it doesn't incorporate proposed work as part of the scope. moving on to it. currently we're in the process of closing out some of the current it projects we have, we're doing upgrades on the apparatus, the computers that get the information and we're
working closely with department technology on a number of upgrades, server, wi-fi at department facilities is gradually being rolled out and in general enhanced security and data capabilities for the department administrative infrastructure. and we have rolled out a number of new technologies to the field, a lot of tablets, for example for training. a lot of the instructors have tablets and the ability to communicate via tablets and then we're rolling out sharepoint, a collaboration tool for members and committees to share information and work together. so here's our proposal for the budget for it projects, incident display boards, kind of a display monitor at facility that shows incident information among dispatch. we have one installed, i believe station seven that seems to be
favorable amongst the members there. sharepoint, the additional training and implementation. training simulators to try to simulate some of the technology available is quite impressive, simulate events virtually. now that the drone program is under development, we have requested money. software solution, converting electronically a lot of the records at the department of physicians office to more electronic and additional tablet deployment to engine crews. and lastly, i'll touch on fleet. as this is generally fleet is part of our equipment request in february but this year's the mayor's office has requested we submit it a little earlier, so
that is also due on the 12th. it's vetted through the city administrative office and mayor's office and they'll develop city wide what fleet needs. all non fleet equipment, fire and ems is submitted as part of the budget in february and all equipment allocations is part of the mayor's budget. as i mentioned earlier, last year's budget approved a capital request for the department and approved a fleet request and i'll get into the fleet plan a little bit here. but this is our allocation that currently exists for the current year and next year in the budget. there are both ambulances and fire prevention vehicles supported by revenue programs. as we discussed at a number of meetings previously, the mayor's
office approved an equipment plan a couple years ago. the current fiscal year is the second year, it is five years. 7 million over the first two and minimum 4 million over the remaining three. the up coming budget corresponds to year three and four of the five-year plan and part of the equipment plan is fleet. fleet is a big emphasis on that. to give you an update, we just received eight fire engines and in the process of ordering six additional units. we have three ladder trucks on order, piloted ambulances being tested in the field currently. five command vehicles and fire prevention vehicles. the other thing the plan has allowed, secure long-term contracts for vehicles, procurement going forward is easier. we have multi year contracts for ladder trucks, fire engines and
command vehicles. here's our proposal for the fleet request, based on the current fire resolution for fleet approved back in 2009. there was discussion of updating that, we have not but we're happy to work with the commissioners if they choose to. there are certain allocations the department is to request and then outstanding items are added together. in essence the way to read the table, a $36 million investment would bring us up to the fire approval resolution levels for fleet and equipment. that's what the request is based off of. with that, happy to answer any questions. >> thank you mr. corso. is there any public comment on mr. corso's report? seeing none, public comment is
closed. commissioners. commissioner veronese. >> mr. corso, thank you for your presentation. just so i understand this, the capital budget request for the capital proposal on page six -- so you have all of these different budgets that you've given us information on, page 3, six, five -- help me understand -- eight and 10. these are all separate budget requests? >> correct, because they are separate kind of committees that review the budgets. at the end of the day they meet up at the mayor's budget proposed june 1st but during the course of evaluation they're vetted through separate entities. the it is vetted through the city's committee on information technology and the fleet is vetted through the mayor's office and city administrative
office. >> and the studies that we're doing -- are we doing the studies or anticipate doing them on page six? >> we're doing some of the work currently as part of the overall bond planning studies that we're doing. there's a number of -- in preparing for the 2020, we're working on a number of studies, overall facilities, training specifically and bureau of equipment with intention that once the ambulance facility moves out, our bureau of equipment would transfer there. >> the study for the training facility, is this a study -- what are we studying? how do we -- how do we study this unless we know the location, what is this study about? >> part of it, i guess study is not the correct word so to speak. it's planning. we're looking at need assessment
is a big part of it. what is the training -- division of training needs for the department. what types of training do they do, what type of facility or equipment would they need for that. that's part of it, regardless of the facility portion of it. but that's also being considered and worked out with the department, department of real estate, department of public works and the mayor's office currently. >> when is that study anticipated to be finished? >> i believe they just completed a portion -- we received a portion, the needs assessment for division of training. i haven't viewed it yet. it was just sent over yesterday. but that's the preliminary study on the training. >> when is it anticipated to be finished? >> we're working closely on the site portion of it, they're in the process of hiring, i guess, not that our folks are not subject matter experts on the
training part but on the facility side, they're contracting with a vender who has expertise on building these facilities and will do additional reports to provide the department. and that should be done in the next two months i believe. >> okay. so that's going to be done in time for us to know what we're looking for as far as a new training facility is concerned? i know that's going to take a long time. i would hate for the study to be completed at a point where it's too late, if you understand where i'm coming from. >> so that is the big issue is the site. the location. i think we have a good grasp of the needs of the department for training, but nailing down the site is the main driver of the work being done right now. >> so that's part of the study is locating a -- identifying a site. >> correct. >> when we do the studies, who are we paying the funds to?
is that -- are we paying that to ourselves? >> dpw usually handles it and they have in-house for design, architecture, etc cetera but they bring in contractors as needed. >> it's part of our budget but we pay dpw to do the work. >> correct. >> okay. one other thing, the elephant on the document, the chief's residence. this is news to me, we have a chief's residence, although i understand the chief doesn't use it. this is a historical structure. >> it was donated -- chief can talk on it. >> there is a residence 870 busch that was occupied by my predecessors mainly because they didn't reside in the city and
it's important to have the fire chief reside in the city because it's a 24/7 job. we have modified it to be an alternate site and facility in the event we need to use it as a back-up department operating center. you're welcome any time to take a look. we do use it every once in a while for off-site meetings and so forth. but it's a property owned and maintained by the department. >> my question -- >> i was just going to say, i believe it was donated to the department -- the history is in 1906 chief dennis sullivan died to injuries he sustained in the earthquake, three days later and people have argued it may have been a very different response had he been in charge.
and so all of that being said there was a woman who left that property to be designed and left for forthcoming fire chiefs. so i believe we obtained it in 1923. >> okay. and so these funds are going to be used to retrofit the building or rehab the building? >> yes. we currently have our back up operation center at the location but there is a number of work that -- a great amount of work that needs to be done to the facility, just updating it. it has not been updated in general. i think there can be -- maybe chief can speak to the specifics and the condition of it, like electrical, kitchen, just in general, there's a bit of work that needs to be done on the facility. >> i want to point out the irony that we're putting this kind of money into a building we don't
use, where we have the historical rigs sitting out in the rain being destroyed and not putting money into those. >> we have not been allocating the funding, we're requesting it. >> are we requesting money to store the historical rigs out in the bayview currently sitting in the rain? >> we are working on that in the current year with dpw site options for storage. obviously we want to get that resolved as soon as possible. that's going on in the current year. >> so the answer is there's nothing in the budget for the historical rigs. >> i'll jump in, the answer is we're trying to find a funding source and hope to have the solution done within this fiscal year. >> okay. thank you mr. corso. >> thank you commissioner
veronese. commissioner hardeman. >> thank you mr. president. thanks for your report mr. corso and the graphics are good. as far as the drone, what does the 150,000 buy the department for the drone? >> that is an estimate for the budget, i think it would incorporate, we don't have the specifics yet, we're still researching, that would theoretically cover the equipment, the hardwear and training and licencing and certification that's required. there's a number of training classes in speaking with former chief of homeland security, he had a number of proposals he received in research, we haven't identified a specific detailed budget yet, but it's assumed to
incorporate hardware and training requirements. >> any particular number of drones that are proximate, to be spread around, certain areas of town, downtown, more than others or -- >> i don't think we have gotten that far as part of the overall plan yet, this would be kind of the initial stages of the implementation of the program. it would be rolled out, but this is the funding requested here would be for the initial stage of the program. >> and i know you and chief talked about the new ambulances, but could you describe -- you talked about the new models coming out, could you describe or do you know of any details that would make the ambulances superior or what's the news about that that is -- you were
talking about the four new ones would be the new type of model? >> i'll defer to the chief on that one. >> thank you. >> good morning. we have type two vehicles, they're single body vehicles which means we're hoping to not have as many frame problems as we had with the two-piece ambulances, the ones we currently have. they're smaller, more maneuverable, the chas chase's better built. the front is much roomier and more comfortable than the ambulances now. the back is designed a little different than the vehicles we have right now. it is a little smaller, the profile of the vehicle is smaller but it is designed for patient care, it's designed for maximum safety of the patient
and occupants, paramedics ore emts. it has several restraint systems for the patients and crew. right now we're doing road tests on the two vehicles, to make sure they have enough horsepower to get up and down our hills and accommodate the equipment that we carry, the size and shape of the equipment we carry. the bureau of equipment is helping us with that right now as well as some of my staff from station 49. once that is done, we'll bring the vehicles to station 49 and stock them according to county protocols and assign them to crews with evaluation forms and turn them out for use. we're going to have several crews evaluate the vehicles and take into consideration what changes they suggest to be made. i'm sure there will be opinions
about seats that we're interested in all the opinions that people have about the vehicles, this is the first model change of a vehicle the city ems has used in almost 50 years. it is new, different, it is going to feel different, it looks different and we're open to suggestions and comments to make these vehicles the best vehicles we can for the city. the city is shrinking around us as well as the streets, they're more difficult to maneuver, there are a lot of potholes. the idea is to make the ride as safe and comfortable as possible for the patients and the crew. we believe with subtle suggestions and modifications, these vehicles will achieve all those goals for us and our patients. >> thank you chief. the seating, occasionally -- we have them in our neighborhood but i live in the west district
and we have a couple of ambulances stationed there occasionally and i walk by and talk to the seat comfort i think is especially in the old ones, as you know, those are getting pretty -- that seems to be a big thing, if you're going to be 10-12 hours sitting sometimes that long in an ambulance, that seat could be really ultra comfortable. my comment is from talking to different of your staff, that is one of the most important things in the vehicle, i would concur sitting there for that length of time that's important. but anyway, that's good news to hear all that. how do you rate the fleet now compared to a few years ago that was pretty rundown. have you rid yourself -- the
department of the 200,000 plus worn out vehicles, are these pretty much disappearing? >> we are rotating vehicles that have exceeded a certain number of miles to be back-up units. we're attempting to keep our newest most robust vehicles as the front line and maintaining the reserve fleet as well. >> terrific news. thank you for the report chief. and thank you for your time -- for letting her use your time mr. corso. >> and vice president nakajo. >> thank you. i appreciate the submittal for the budget request, it's a lot.
it's a lot lot -- i appreciate the work that has to get done for the numbers. the san francisco fire department request that has certain narratives if we can give more comprehensive information it breaks down by the station certain costs depending upon areas, whether they're it matters that you broke down with a narrative or capital budget request, all of these narratives help quite a bit in terms of the comp he comprehension of the budget. these go together, right? >> yes and when we submit it's part of the justification as well. >> as a point of clarification, the capital fleet is an annual request? >> correct. >> and the annual request for
our department? >> essentially all of it will end up at the board for one budget. >> these due dates are all on the same kind of calendar of due dates? >> the fleet, capital and it are due on friday and then the budget itself is due on the 21st of february. >> and every process has to go through the review process of what the mayor's office and back to the department before the submittals? >> specifically for the it and the capital projects, they go through capital planning committee and the committee on information technology respectively. and we work closely, they vet all projects city wide, not just our department. we meet with them, they go over the project descriptions, they overall as a committee, we present at the committee and they review and make
recommendations to the committee as a whole. and they develop scenarios that are reviewed by the mayor's office, once the mayor's office has a better idea of the overall funding levels for the committee. >> and that comes back to the department for review or input? >> we're involved all along, yes. >> during that time we're involved. >> yes, we're discussing with the mayor's office overall. >> when is this final date of submittal? >> it usually gets finalized more or less in mid may before the june 1st submittal by the mayor's office to the board. >> we're at the beginning process this year. >> yes, sir. >> page 3, i think you narrated the plan, i know you referred to the narrative as to what that reference of dollar amount is referred to, what kind of work
it -- planning? >> mainly planning, needs assessment, etc cetera. we work, the chief and his staff meet with the folks for not just the current projects but looking at needs and priorities going forward and specifically getting closer to -- it's still a little ways away but the 2020 bond, what is the department's priorities there and what projects are we looking at, what planning work can we do ahead of time, both part of the required public information available at the time of vote foring for the general public and driving the public bond. >> which is part of this process, that has the department come to these particular numbers? >> so -- which numbers are you talking to? >> in general. you made reference that the planning process required by us in terms of our needs helps us
identify a dollar cost what it's going to take us to fix these various areas. >> correct. dpw does that and is in the process of looking at all department facilities and all the different systems and the actual cost. when we initially started the program, a lot of the estimates were just that, estimates. now that we're a few years into the program, we have more concrete data as far as what it costs to fix it. a lot of the information is being updated into the planning efforts. >> i think my point is those costs are very important because previous experience of the department, those numbers were ambiguous at best, now with working with the chief and such, i'm thinking we have current numbers that reflect the current needs at a current cost? >> absolutely. one of the good things that all
the -- good and bad, a lot of the work has allowed us to get more information on the facilities and actual needs and costs. the bad news is, we're realizing the actual cost of the facility repairs are higher than anticipated before the bond because we hadn't been doing any of them. you have the market conditions and the complications of all the issues involved with replacing a generator, say, now we have more firm actual cost for the jobs and can incorporate that into the planning. >> i recollect, i said one of the goals we at the department wanted to achieve over the years to be current, current in terms of our costs. i'm moving over to page 4. i think you did talk about the new ambulance deployment facility.
i was going to ask for an update. it seems the answer to that is identifying the site is the priority at this point. they would start with -- >> are you referring to the training or ambulance facility. >> ambulance. >> we have identified the site for ambulance facility. they're about 95% design completion. i'm sure we can request dpw to do an update. as we get closer to completion of design, i'm sure we can discuss with them coming in and doing an updated presentation. >> i'll probably refer that as a future item. thank you for that. i appreciate the fact that on page 8 that the drone program implementation at least has a line item within our budget, which i'm assuming now we're housing within a particular category of it? >> correct. considering that the city has put that under the it umbrella,
we have considered that as well and requesting under that request for project. >> moving to page 12, last question and then i have a comment. at the bottom of your page 12 you have a comment referencing in terms of requested fleet terms of resolution 2009-05, you are referring to the commission resolution that former president was part of that we adopted in this department so that we can have consistent requests in terms of fleet and truck replacement. >> so the original resolution was included in 2007 and updated in 2009, that's the one i'm referencing. that establishes an overall number of apparatus that the department needs and what we should be requesting on an
annual basis as a budget request. what we have been doing every year is following that. we would keep a running total of what was not funded over all of those years and that's what you're seeing before you in this 30 plus million dollar fleet request, would be to match up to what was being parameters of the approved commission resolution. >> thank you director corso. i want to make reference to my fellow commissioners, prior to 2007 there was no "commission policy" in terms of this. i'm just referencing that upgraded 2009 as a piece created by the commission in terms of policy effect within the department. i appreciate that. my last comment is that at some point or another, i know the department has owned various properties in the city. i remember at some point just
again in memory, not specifically trying to be factual in some ways, we did have properties during the years of if i recollect, deficit spending and i believe chief you were part at the time, and we had to contemplate selling properties and we did, painful, painful. that we as the department had to sell properties that we owned, so we can go through actual operations. i only bring that up, too, the discussion on the chief's residence as to what it is and what it represents and what can we do with it, prior to that chief hayes-white, every chief i encountered lived at the residence. since then the dcity has
requested to use for different means. the fire chief of san francisco 1906 passed away as a result of the earthquake, chief sullivan. i think for us to take some contemplations in terms of future discussions on it but asking for upgraded repairs is something that is appropriate, if we're able to grant that, i think respectfully, an teague rigs we have are always a concern for all of us in terms of what it is. i thought we were under a shelter at this time presently but i'm not quite sure about that. part of that was the guardians of the city that handled that particular area. i know we the department are responsible for that, but i think that's another area that creative contemplation or research or thinking of how we can fund that beyond the means of the budget, if we can request
it from the city budget i think we should do that, but i think we need an overall plan of how to shelter that. thank you director corso. >> thank you mr. vice president. commissioner covington. >> thank you mr. president. through the president, excuse me, i would like to ask the chief to come back to the microphone. thank you mr. corso for your comprehensive report. i would like to request that our next meeting is an afternoon meeting, we begin at 5:00, perhaps at 4:15, 4:30 thereabouts we could have the new model ambulance and old model ambulance outside of city hall and you can give commissioners an orientation as to the differences. i know we have gone from the
chase and replaceable big box to this new configuration and i'm not able to visualize the differences. i just know there's been a seat change. it would be helpful for you to point out to at least me why we're making this change and what the advantages are. you know, you have described them verbally but it would be good to see them. >> we can certainly accommodate anything that the commission requests and each and every one of you are always welcome at station 49 to see the equipment and vehicles and we're more than happy to accommodate anything you request. >> and i wanted to know, perhaps this is -- thank you. perhaps this is a question for mr. corso, once we have the new ambulances, have we replaced half of the ambulances or is it more? i know we're adding to the
number that we had previously. >> correct. >> but how many more ambulances are necessary? >> so i believe in the past i want to say four years with the funding we have replaced over half of the ambulance fleet. the two are just new, they're not meant as replacement, if everything goes well, we can make modifications and move forward and replace those. one of the benefits of the new ambulances, the cost is less expensive than the current units we have. we could obviously purchase more. based on the replacement plan, we would be looking at over the next two budget years, 26 additional units and that would bring all the ambulances up to the guidelines set forth.
>> very good. that's going to be exciting. regarding the it portion i want to express a concern. it in the budget is fairly new but it comes with built in obsoleteness, how are we going to sustain this level down the line sustain cutting edge technology. does to money continue to come out of the general fund or another source we're looking at. >> in general it comes out of the general fund whether in the city wide budget or department budget just on the basic level of replacing computers
throughout the department, there's a city-wide refresh program that helps identify the oldest computers city wide and helps purchase new ones and then departments can use that pricing to buy additional units as needed. there are programs like that city-wide that address the basic technology infrastructure refreshing. on our side we have budget and equipment for our tablets for the paramedics who do the epcr, the charts, those kind of things, we have a regular replacement in our budget for that along with some of the tablets we have deployed to battalion chiefs, for example, that is absorbed in the budget. the basic software is handled city wide that allows
departments over the basic terms and factored into the department of technology. is there something specific you're -- >> no, i understand certainly what you're saying. but you have described a scenario that works extremely well during flesh times. i'm talking about the lean years. are we going to be faced at some point with having a technology that is so out moded because we don't have the money to refresh, that lives may be in jeopardy? so are we looking for an additional funding source other than the general fund specifically for technology? >> currently i think that's -- i would say some of our grant
submittals surround technology more. more refreshing technology and equipment, defibrillators, anythings like that, technology advancement that makes some of the older equipment more obsolete. we did that last year, some of the new technology was so far ahead of what we currently had, we were able to replace them that way. some through federal grants. we are looking in that avenue but overall technology, i don't think we're specifically pursuing the avenues. >> we have been successful in securing federal grants for technological needs. >> yes. more on the equipment side when you're talking about technology upgrades than the basic computer or something like that. but we have done some federal grants for hazardous materials monitors equipment, things like that, defibrillators and a number of other pieces of
equipment. >> i hope those grants continue to be available and perhaps there's something available on the state level as well. thank you mr. corso. >> thank you commissioner covington. mr. corso, i have a number of questions. in this budget, capital budget request, there's no money, i guess for any sort of extension of the awss or the pwss, correct? that's something that's come up and has been discussed, it's been in the media. i just wonder if we're planning or putting anything in the capital budget to extend it. >> for the capital, we're not submitting anything capital related, technically the function has moved to the pc. the pws we do.
it will be part of the overall budget and i'll touch on that at the next meeting. that's part of the overall equipment request. >> would that include additional pumps? >> essentially, yes. overall allocation to determine the priority of need for equipment. >> there's renewed interest in that and i think it's important to add to our budget. >> not that it's renewed from our perspective because we have always been advocating for it, it's a need we recognize. >> question, dealing with the public works department, do we have any of their employees identified as people who will work with the fire department on a regular basis to maintain our
properties? we have talked about that in the past, people who can service the fire department facilities. has that been done? >> not specifically individually identified. we have one station engineer who works for the fire department and then a number of dpw employees not specifically assigned to fire that we call when they use dpw for facility work, they have a pool available employees. we do not have specifically assigned positions, we have requested in the previous year, i anticipate doing it this year, some of the trades to be assigned as employees. the difficulties is the no net new positions makes that a little difficult but we talk to the mayor's office about that, that is a priority for the
department. >> i think it would make it easier to, you know, fix up our firehouses when they have problems if we have people within dpw specifically familiar with the operations and firehouses and physical properties of the firehouses in order to get the work done faster. the biggest thing is the wait. if we have people familiar already, they can get the work done quicker. we don't have to have specific people all the time, but a roster of people who have done work with the department on department properties, those people can be assigned on a regular basis to fire department issues, whether it's fixing showers or toilets or whatever it might be. it would make it faster and i think our fire department personnel would benefit having people in the dpw etidentified
working on the properties. >> unfortunately we have a lot of issues so there are a lot of people familiar with the facilities. they're working through their challenges as well. but point understood. >> director mohammed and his department are doing a fine job, i'm not saying they're not. but if we can identify people within the department to work on our properties, we'll be ahead of the game. looking at the budget request, we need $33 million, how much is realized, but we're only asking for 1.2. we have 33 million in needs and only asking for 1.2. is that correct? >> no. that's not correct. >> that's just the it budget. >> yes, that's it. >> what are we asking for in total, needs versus asking? >> i do want to talk a bit on that briefly. just in general on the capital
and fleet side. on the capital side we have been very happy to be a part of this bond program and they have done a number of projects beneficial to the department and our facilities are in the best shape they have been in in a long time. that said, we're still looking at over $500 million in deferred costs for our facility. while we are -- allocation, our request looks significant, in the grand scheme of things it's still a piece of overall need. dpw is doing further analysis on what that number is, with the investments over the past few years, we still have a significant deficit. same on the fleet where we're very fortunate, the mayor's office has allocated a fleet and equipment replacement plan but we're still playing catch up quite a bit. that's why some of the numbers are quite large for submittal.
to answer your question on the capital budget, our request is $33 million in the first year and 53 in the second year. that's our request to the capital planning committee and those are projects not anticipated to be covered under the bond program. >> how much do you actually think we'll realize out of that. do you have any idea? >> based off last year, looking at 3-5 million dollars for all facilities. >> maybe 10%. all right. on your it budget, you have the display boards of 300,000, how many stations will that add? >> i believe that's for all of the stations that have multiple companies in them. specifically. so if you're in a single company station and you get a dispatch, you know who it's for because there's only one company there.
station seven there are multiple companies, crews can see who it is for and the details. those have been reviewed favorably. >> we have an agreement that we'll replace the fleet and increase our personnel through 2020. but there's been no discussions about rolling that over and continuing that agreement. correct? >> correct. >> when do we start those discussions? >> that would probably be with the next administration. we can't really address that, even that final year of it for the equipment plan is beyond the two year budget we're looking at here. we haven't reached that. i believe we'll probably bring it up with the mayor's office with this round of budget discussions to keep it on the radar both for hiring and equipment. i think the goal is to catch up and then develop a sustainability plan going